Kevin Nash

[Dylan Waco]

Discuss Here.

[Timbo Slice]

So this is probably an outlier's way of thinking, but I think that when he was with the right guy, he could have himself a pretty damn good match. The Bret matches were good, the Michaels Good Friends, Better Enemies match was great considering Michaels was a wreck at the time, and that Goldberg match before the finish saw him bumping around like a madman for him, something that surprised the hell out of me when I actually watched it a while back.

 

I don't think he's anywhere near a Top 100, but I also think that he was a lot better than what people give him credit for, because the politics bullshit is such a big thing about him. But when he wanted to show he could go, he showed it. Problem was he really didn't give a fuck for a good part of his career.

[Loss]

Who's better at JobbingNotJobbing -- Nash or HHH?

[Timbo Slice]

Who's better at JobbingNotJobbing -- Nash or HHH?

Oh, Triple H is still the king of all this. He's still doing it now.

[El McKell]

He's not very good, I can't imagine ranking him, but I wanna ask is him not being in the index of nominees a conspiracy against him? 

[strobogo]

I think Nash is underrated for sure. The last 2-3 years of WCW of pure and absolutely laziness really colors his entire career, but you can go back to even the Oz and Vinnie Vegas days and he was not just a big slug in the ring. There are certainly a lot of guys his size who are a lot, lot, lot worse. His matches with Bret are absolute top tier WWF main events in the 90s, the match with HBK is probably the best match of HBK's entire run as top babyface, all of his matches in WCW though 1997 are real strong to great. His short WWE return wasn't bad, either. His TNA run(s) has a lot of entertaining work. 

Top 100 all time, probably not. Top 100 big men, absolutely. 

[El McKell]

I agree with you that Nash is underrated, but I do not agree that he’s really good in 96 & 97 WCW

[strobogo]

Those Outsiders tags in 1996 and 1997 are real strong, imo

[Grimmas]

On 12/16/2021 at 9:51 AM, El McKell said:

He's not very good, I can't imagine ranking him, but I wanna ask is him not being in the index of nominees a conspiracy against him? 

Fixed

[Ma Stump Puller]

When he's arsed, he's actually fairly good for his size and height. Nash may be "lazy" or "unmotivated" at times but he's got a good understanding of timing and psychology: he was never going to do a lot anyway given his injuries and age but he wrestled a style that was realistic and didn't try to take any shine from his opponents. He knew how to make underdogs get incredibly over, he was always generous for hot tags or big acts when selling, and despite his rep as a pretty prolific figure that popularised wrestling politicization, he wasn't someone who mindlessly got pushed to the top: Nash had obvious charisma and the size to go along with it. He was smart enough to use his limitations as strengths, which I can most assuredly say not many wrestlers in general could do. 

Get him in the ring with people who he respects, he'll put on a good show. I feel like that aspect got overlooked while Hall got overhyped as the guy who could actually go (even if his record isn't exactly much improved: in fact I'd say Nash beats him out in terms of WCW stuff overall) which is unfortunate. Top 100? Hell no, but he certainly wouldn't be miles off that either. 

 

[JewishJoshiStan]

It's not hyperbole to say that I'm honored to be posting here after reading PWO content for years (it was the "A Thread In Which Dylan Compares Various Wrestlers to HHH" that hooked me)

To me the debate on Nash is whether he's underrated (or perhaps whether we agree with Dylan's claim in that thread that Nash and HHH are basically equal in overall merit). Consideration of him for a list like this is, at best, WWE/WCW-centrism at its worst. (See Genre notes below). If someone wanted to try a WWE/WCW top 100 list and put Nash on it I probably wouldn't bitch. I say probably...though I'm very confident I can think of 100 WWE/F performers who smoke him. 

Positives: He was certainly part of a hot period for business. I buy his claim that the early success of the NWO was him and Hall with Hogan jumping on the train before it took off, blah blah.  

I'll briefly mention one Nash match that I think fairly represents his shortcomings in a variety of areas I look at (and discuss them in connection to my own metric):

Slamboree 1997...my rubric's acronym is NJPW CAGE (Nuance Jumpup Promos Workrate Character Appeal Genre and Elevation) ; it refers to the 8 things I like to take into account. 

Nuance and Character: There's a moment in this match when he tags in and has an absolute babyface expression. I am Nash, I am pissed, and here I come to save the day. That is *burned into my memory* as a reason this *very* heated match didn't work as well as it was supposed to. Nash either didn't know how to or chose not to adjust his expressions and actions in many big situations or just didn't because of self-interest. Either way, a match featuring Piper and Flair versus the terrifying new wave threat and...the crowd wants to pull for Nash.  

Jumpup: Can't think of anything Nash ever did that wowed me. It's harder when you're that size to perform a feat of awesome strength (just look at the fuckup with Giant), but...his rockstar presence was sorta "here comes the big man." I don't really get wrestling fandom that consists of spectators just getting wowed by size.  

Promos: Look at the build to that match. Nash's comments (the "Pothole" speech) was both weak (whining about Hall's salary cut even as he parenthetically acknowledged he sucked and therefore it wasn't unfair at *all* that he wasn't being pushed) and certainly failed to sell himself and his team as the heel. I for one find 90% of business-exposing promos a negative, and man alive that one was ass.  

Workrate: I feel lazy for breezing by this (simply because he's an almost legendary low-workrate dude). I have to call the bump from the Fingerpoke one of the moments I most despise in wrestling history* because it truly proved him as capable of bumping better than he did when it was supposed to be real. Only bump I've ever seen that took a piss on the business (unless you count the HBK/Hogan match). 

*Not a zealous anti-fingerpoke guy; I just hate that weirdly workman-like bump.

Appeal: Aside from wanting to see some of his Bret matches because he gets good reviews for them, I can't imagine wanting to see a Nash match (have seen all HBK PPVs). This is one department I'd be interested to hear counterarguments for. 

Genre: I've seen Glenn Jacobs deviate from the coprorate American style more than Nash. As someone who treasures diversity, this doesn't help him.  

Elevation: I'll admit it's hard to seperate reputation from what I can see bell to bell with Nash in terms of putting other people over. Still, I really don't see him as someone who made anyone apart from his buddies look good (note above caviet about the Bret matchs). 

I hope to contribute better comments on more interesting cases than Nash's for top 100 of all-time, all-styles, etc. (sorry, I just feel like it's a pretty foregone conclusion) but it's been nice trying to contribute my subjective-but-with-indicators approach here at least. 

 

 

[JewishJoshiStan]

On 3/4/2016 at 2:56 PM, Timbo Slice said:

So this is probably an outlier's way of thinking, but I think that when he was with the right guy, he could have himself a pretty damn good match. The Bret matches were good, the Michaels Good Friends, Better Enemies match was great considering Michaels was a wreck at the time, and that Goldberg match before the finish saw him bumping around like a madman for him, something that surprised the hell out of me when I actually watched it a while back.

 

I don't think he's anywhere near a Top 100, but I also think that he was a lot better than what people give him credit for, because the politics bullshit is such a big thing about him. But when he wanted to show he could go, he showed it. Problem was he really didn't give a fuck for a good part of his career.

This really shouldn't be controversial. He's not a trainwreck at all (if my above comments suggest such I should edit). Maybe he's best suited for a "100 Most Underwhelming of all-time" list because he clearly could've been much more. 

[CurtainJerker]

He was fantastic on the mic, great look, historically significant, and helped draw TV ratings and PPVs. But what are his Top 10 matches again? How many years was he a Top 10 worker? I mean very basic Gordy List questions...